> No nothing is thread safe in Drools 3.0 Mark, can you please clarify this statement? Are you referring to all Drools classes? Or you simply meant that the objects we use wouldn't get special protection from Drools?
I raised the question a while back about the thread-safety of RuleBase, and got a positive answer from Michael. Now this sweeping statement got me worried again.:) My scenario: Multiple threads accessing the same instance of RuleBase, each creating a new WorkingMemory, asserting their own facts, then firing. Can RuleBase handle that? Thanks, Yuesong --- Mark Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No nothing is thread safe in Drools 3.0 - unless you > use the > SyncrhonisedWorkingMemory. then it just adds a synch > method to each of > thte WorkingMemory methods. With regards to > "application data" no called > globals - if you use that wrapper the > workingMemory.setGloba(...) is > synchronized but ofcourse if you change fields > inside of a global > already in the working memory then that is up to > you, its not something > Drools can control. > > Mark > Susan G Lee wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is the application data in the drl files thread > safe? For example, if one > > thread comes in the call a rule that requires to > modify the application > > data. Before it finishes, another thread comes in > to modify the same > > application data variable and completes the > processing. would the first > > thread see the second thread's modification or it > will still see the value > > that it modified to? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Susan G. Lee > > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
